Friday, 27 November 2015

How dare you speak like that?

Keeping Anupam Kher aside...
The "logic" that tries to prevent one from expressing his/her concern on any topic is the point of discussion here.

It starts when you are young and begin to voice your opinions about your parents. This rational thinking is dealt with the emotional superiority of your elders. You will be chided along that parents are next only to God! And you are reminded of their innumerable sacrifices. You are told that it is the matter of their unconditional love and you should display unconditional respect, period!

You are not supposed to complain about the behavior of the elders either... you will be sermonized: "they have done so much to the family! they achieved so much! they have seen the world! you have just opened your eyes to the world! you are still wet behind your ears! how dare you open your mouth?!" You are dissuaded from making up your own mind about any one basing on your experience.

You are not supposed to comment about the customs and rituals which seem absurd to you, again you are firmly corrected, "these traditions are centuries old, time tested, Think thousand times before commenting them with your half knowledge." You are asked to refrain yourself from entering the land of Mysterious and Sacred if you can not leave your reason and rationality well behind

You are not supposed to find fault not just in your leaders but in the social activists too.  They are doing so much to the society, what right you have got to talk about them, you mere common common man?" You are not expected to say it aloud that the personal and public behaviours of those 'supposedly' great men do not match.

The mistakes committed in the movements or by the great leaders is considered to be a Taboo even among the sympathizers. The critics whose intentions are genuine are also not spared. They are attacked by the band of blind supporters.

It is ridiculous that my 'averageness' or 'commonness' is not counted offensive if I decide to sing praises on any of these 'great' entities. I am sure that the artists are not going to be frowned upon when they dare to personify the myths whether in their poems, fiction or paintings, as long as they see only the beauty and glory in the past. 

My contention is with the discrimination in the field of criticism. It is understandable that one is offended when faced with criticism that involves himself personally and he is right in defending himself. But when the issue is a general one and involves every one, the defense almost loses track  and questions the critic's credentials.

One who is intolerant of any kind of criticism, should be reminded that the country, people, heritage, past and future belong to every one. It is not some 'special' one's prerogative to protect them. One has to point out a flaw if it needs to be corrected. 


The ballads and love songs weaved in the glory (whether they are for the nation or culture or revolution) can not substitute the constructive criticism born out of legitimate concerns of the individuals. It is high time that we let them speak with out getting offended and stop black listing them as traitors.

Sunday, 22 November 2015

we are too stupid to see that!


THIS IS WHAT WE SAY..... ........ .... ....... 
you think about holes, you are not artistic enough to see the beauty...
you talk about holes, you are spreading negativity around you...
you try to do something about holes, you are an 'activist',not a regular person...
Sure glad the hole isn't at our end...Hence....
We prefer to sit back and enjoy our journey....

TryLife's photo.
but I would like to say to every one who tries to fool me...

Monday, 9 November 2015

Manipulations are required only to promote 'falseness'!

Some excerpts from the above link :

How and why does the ordinary Hindutva footsoldier act the way he or she does? Basically, he (and occasionally, she) is made to believe things that most people would know to be false.

 Paranoid in its content, it is also illustrative of the way the RSS ‘rumour-machine’ works to produce lies. 

The Sinister and Nefarious Design of Breaking India forces EXPOSED. MUST READ for Modi Govt. Supporters. [Capital letters in the original. By putting ‘Exposed’ in big block letters, the willing Hindutva reader is given the impression that what s/he is about to read is based on some actual investigation and revelation of facts.

The appearance of talking factually is however continuously maintained, even when the most outlandish claims are being made, except that now some initial steps towards ‘analysis’ and logical deduction’ also begin to be made:

 it shows actually how vulnerable the Hindu Right is feeling that it has to make the following appeal of its supporters:

All of these dangerous schemes are not specific to BJP but they are true to all the ruling parties across the world with some minor variations. The 'state' machinery relies entirely on this technique and this is called 'managing the public perception'. Some of the extraordinary minds work in its conception and propagation and they are generously paid for their services.

The crudity of the plan and haste in the execution makes it conspicuous in the present case. 

We should learn to guard our minds against these manipulations. 


Thursday, 5 November 2015

The Cause is important! ... ... not who is in it...

Translation of the above article:

Try to imagine a vast crowded area in which you are lost, your voice dies into the noise around you and you are not sure whether your words make sense to the person next to you. Desperately you try to find some means to reach out to your lost friends. Suddenly you remember that you possess a flag that represents your tribe. You decide to keep the flag in the hands of the tallest person so as to attract your friends who have been scattered all around. 

What can you say if some one questions the choice of the flag bearer claiming that the tallest person is no better than any other. Your reply would be, "Don't you get the simple point? It is a matter of increased Visibility! By doing this we are drawing attention, which serves our purpose."

The 'returning of awards' is a symbolic gesture which attracts the masses and compels them to think about the growing intolerance in the society. For once, the initiative is attracting international media as well for all the right reasons and it is not a bad sign.

Cricketers had protested a few years back, against the high handedness of the Board. They stood united and it looked like they had succeeded to some extent. No one from the cricket world neither questioned their credibility nor trivialized their stance, in spite of the fact that match fixing scandals were doing the rounds. When a film star or a celebrity extends their support to any cause, I don't remember any one discouraging their effort by saying that the stars are pitching to grab attention.

More over, have we ever seen a person who is in distress, and yet denies the help  offered to him on the grounds that the fame of the celebrity is fake or ill earned.  I know for sure that when one is in trouble, he would grab any help that comes his way with both the hands . He would never argue about as to why they have decided to help now and why not sooner.

But in this case, the writers are targeted not only by the politicians but by the fellow literary minds as well for speaking out their mind on behalf of all the 'rational beings' .

It is a known fact that the oppressed classes and especially the poorer minorities are more susceptible to the manifestations of the religious intolerance. They tend to become the easy victims of the cruelties of the Powerful. There is a possibility that these oppressed classes would get the due representation while the protest of the writers gains momentum.  

Some people undermine this fact saying that the award system was almost always dominated by the upper classes. Hence they call the issue of award rejection, an elite affair. But, contrary to their belief  when the writers' united voice gains strength, it can bring the turmoils of the less fortunate into the creative space more vividly. 

It is a wise thing to see the reason behind the activity as more important than the person who is performing it. One needs to check whether it is a justified cause to protest against the intolerance and if he/she feels that it will help the people, then they should use their discretion in supporting it. 

Now we witness an unusual development- along with the writers, some artists decided to return their awards too "in protest of the Fascist attitudes". Relinquishing their customary neutral stance, some of the top scientists as well, chose to join the brigade and to express their angst. Government's persistent refusal to acknowledge the issue of protest proves the very necessity of the dissent.

It looks like the 'esteemed personalities' who were honoured by the state, for their 'invaluable contribution' in their respective fields, have become unworthy opponents over night. Their point of view is considered as a political remark and the government is not ready to lend an ear to the 'luminaries'.To add insult to the injury they are called names by the political hot heads.

The biggest achievement for any movement lies in the building up of a Public Opinion. The intelligentsia would aspire to involve the common man in the 'cause' by raising the right objections, asking the relevant questions, conducting debates and educating him

Doubting the integrity of these writers or the validity of the award distribution system at this point would inadvertently harm the spirit of the movement. The common man would distance himself from the issue as he would see it as an 'internal debate of the intellectuals'.

Yet, if one so strongly feels against the whole issue of protest and would wish to exercise their 'Right to Express', he can continue to do so but not at the cost of the common man. I request those people who are against the awards distribution system to fulfill their obligation of a social commentator towards the 'greater good'.

Kindly spare a small portion in your essays to take stock of the situation, investigate the reason for the Protest, analyse the steps of the government in that light, warn the people of the consequences of religious intolerance and condemn the fascist attitudes before these very attitudes take deep roots into the society.

Some intellectuals say that they don't want to participate in this protest as they identify their awards as State Recognition. It is a personal choice to make. But I would like to remind them that they can still question the methods of the government, if they see the need for it. Every one and any one can take up the cause according to his ability and make his fellow citizens aware of this issue.

The thought of protesting against the autocracy is noble kindly spare us the politicization of the issue when the stakes are huge.




Tuesday, 3 November 2015

I like Kamal Haasan! but... ...

After listening to him publicizing about 'swach bharat abhiyan' for months, I was anticipating this cowardliness, still this betrayal is tragic. 

He was bragging about his principles for his entire life and playing the victim of intolerance. Now,when the opportune moment arrives to make a significant statement, he talks nonsense.

Actor Kamal Haasan on Tuesday made it clear that he would not return his National Award to protest against the perceived rise of intolerance in the country.
"I tolerate all religions though I am not religious," he said and added that intolerance must be debated once every five years. 
On several esteemed writers returning their awards to protest the growing level of intolerance, he said, "Nothing will happen by returning the awards except that you will insult the government and the people who gave the awards to you with love."
Agreeing that the move of returning awards did draw attention to the issue, he said, "You'll bring attention to it. But then, there are many more ways of drawing attention. One article by you will help bring more attention."
The actor said that he thought that the award winners should keep their awards and yet continue the fight against intolerance.